SynthesisEuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology2025
Suture-based versus plug-based closure for large-bore arterial access: an individual patient-level meta-analysis of randomised trials.
Synthesis in EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Enhanced recovery after surgery turnkey order set for periprocedural care of the patient undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement.JTCVS structural and endovascular · 2026Article
- Management of femoral large-bore access and closure during microaxial flow pump-supported interventions.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Review
- The great debate in vascular closure: a meta-analysis points to a clear winner.EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPercutaneous large-bore arteriotomy closure devices are either suture- or plug-based. The comparative efficacy and safety of both techniques and optimal patient selection remain controversial.
aimsWe aimed to conduct a patient-level meta-analysis of randomised trials comparing suture-based ProGlide versus plug-based MANTA large-bore vascular closure devices (VCDs).
methodsWe searched PubMed, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Google Scholar for randomised controlled trials comparing vascular closure with the ProGlide-based and the MANTA-based technique. The primary endpoint of this analysis was access site-related vascular complications defined according to the Valve Academic Research Consortium-3 criteria.
resultsWe identified 2 trials that enrolled a total of 722 patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation. The primary endpoint was significantly less common after vascular closure with the ProGlide-based technique (odds ratio [OR] 0.54, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.35-0.82). Access site-related bleeding events were also less common with the ProGlide-based technique (OR 0.41, 95% CI: 0.18-0.94). Prespecified subgroup analyses did not reveal any subgroup favouring the plug-based technique. Clinical outcomes with the MANTA-based technique were better in larger-sized vessels. Patients who received the ProGlide-based technique were less likely to undergo endovascular stenting or vascular surgery (OR 0.22, 95% CI: 0.06-0.79).
conclusionsIn this patient-level meta-analysis of randomised trials, the ProGlide-based technique for large-bore arterial access was superior to the MANTA-based technique in terms of vascular and bleeding complications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.